Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 42

Thread: Follow Me Tactical Decision Game

  1. #21
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Redleg7 View Post
    When I ran Decisive Action exercises at CGSC the students would always complain that one aspect or another wasn't "realistic" and I would tell them "No crap Sherlock it's a freakin game". My COL showed us a slide with the following quote:

    All models are wrong; some models are useful.
    -- generally attributed to the statistician George Box

    We get pushback in regards to realism all the time. For what we are doing close enough is good enough. My question to those officers would be did you learn something useful? It's really up to the instructor to manage those expectations up front. A lot of pushback comes from "professional" modeling and sims types who have a hard time wrapping their minds around abstractions. Anyone who has played a boardgame will understand abstractions. If you look at the big sims I'd say that all of them model at the individual entity level or close to it. JWARS, WARSIM, JCATS, BBS, JANUS, etc are all entity level.
    One of the things I've been wondering about lately is whether advances in computational power, AI, and interface have diminished this made this problem, or made it greater.

    On the one hand, we can make both the game interface and the opponent AI much more sophisticated than ever before. Driven by the multi-billion dollar commercial gaming industry, this continues to develop by leaps and bounds.

    On the other hand, when simulations look like simulations (as with any board game), users can also more easily recognize--and potentially consider and debate--the assumptions that are built into the game design. That's less likely to occur, I think, as the sophistication of a computer game increases.

    Whether this matter depends to some extent on what we're modelling. If it is straight force-on-force, the physics and Pks and so forth have been well understood by the OR folks for years. When we get into social dynamics—so essential to most COIN/stabilization scenarios—its all rather more indeterminate. In those cases, I think there's a real danger of increasingly sophisticated simulations passing off as "fact" what is essentially not very well understood.

    This is an argument that one sometimes hears in the physical and design sciences--that for all its remarkable contributions, for example, CAD has also come at a cost in the quality of architectural production. (For those who are interested in the critique, see Sherry Turkle's Simulation and its Discontents). As we develop increasingly sophisticated COIN simulations, and try to capture the complex political behaviour of actors with derived rules or algorithms, there any risk of the same sort of problems?

    I don't have a firm position on the issue, but i do think its an interesting set of questions...
    They mostly come at night. Mostly.


  2. #22
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
    One of the things I've been wondering about lately is whether advances in computational power, AI, and interface have diminished this made this problem, or made it greater.

    On the one hand, we can make both the game interface and the opponent AI much more sophisticated than ever before. Driven by the multi-billion dollar commercial gaming industry, this continues to develop by leaps and bounds.

    On the other hand, when simulations look like simulations (as with any board game), users can also more easily recognize--and potentially consider and debate--the assumptions that are built into the game design. That's less likely to occur, I think, as the sophistication of a computer game increases.

    Whether this matter depends to some extent on what we're modelling. If it is straight force-on-force, the physics and Pks and so forth have been well understood by the OR folks for years. When we get into social dynamics—so essential to most COIN/stabilization scenarios—its all rather more indeterminate. In those cases, I think there's a real danger of increasingly sophisticated simulations passing off as "fact" what is essentially not very well understood.


    I don't have a firm position on the issue, but i do think its an interesting set of questions...
    In regards to COIN we have a variety of references, histories, to use as a baseline. The game itself would have to be flexible enough to "tweak" as we apply current lessons learned. And finally it's up to the instructor or proponents of the model to provide any disclaimers in regards to the modeling.

    I think a smaller game with narrower learning objectives is very doable.
    TJ
    War Fighting Simulation Center
    United States Military Academy
    Follow Me Wiki
    West Point NY

  3. #23
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Redleg7 View Post
    In regards to COIN we have a variety of references, histories, to use as a baseline. The game itself would have to be flexible enough to "tweak" as we apply current lessons learned. And finally it's up to the instructor or proponents of the model to provide any disclaimers in regards to the modeling.

    I think a smaller game with narrower learning objectives is very doable.
    I think what could be interesting would be to randomize some of the baseline social relationships, so that a player/student would be encouraged to ask the right questions, rather than blindly copy historical approaches that were themselves highly contextually dependent.

    Take, for example, the relationship between unemployment levels and support for insurgency. In some conflicts the relationship is positive (unemployment creates grievances and makes it easier for insurgents to hire guns), in some cases there is no relationship at all, and in a few cases the relationship is actually negative (employment generates resources which are funnelled to the insurgents). Similarly, tribes and tribal leaders are very important in some places--and not in others.

    A truly effective COIN game would encourage the participant to map the human terrain and be wary of cookie-cutter approaches. However, that is a bit of a departure for game designers--who have tended to work with unchanging physics models in the game engine. Still, it could be quite easily done.
    They mostly come at night. Mostly.


  4. #24
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    15

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
    I think what could be interesting would be to randomize some of the baseline social relationships, so that a player/student would be encouraged to ask the right questions, rather than blindly copy historical approaches that were themselves highly contextually dependent.

    Take, for example, the relationship between unemployment levels and support for insurgency. In some conflicts the relationship is positive (unemployment creates grievances and makes it easier for insurgents to hire guns), in some cases there is no relationship at all, and in a few cases the relationship is actually negative (employment generates resources which are funnelled to the insurgents). Similarly, tribes and tribal leaders are very important in some places--and not in others.

    A truly effective COIN game would encourage the participant to map the human terrain and be wary of cookie-cutter approaches. However, that is a bit of a departure for game designers--who have tended to work with unchanging physics models in the game engine. Still, it could be quite easily done.
    Something along the lines of a COIN SimCity.
    TJ
    War Fighting Simulation Center
    United States Military Academy
    Follow Me Wiki
    West Point NY

  5. #25
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Redleg7 View Post
    Something along the lines of a COIN SimCity.
    That's what UrbanSim appears to be. I haven't played around with the software, but I would be worried if it somehow universalized (say) Fallujah as the model for all urban COIN everywhere always.
    They mostly come at night. Mostly.


  6. #26
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
    That's what UrbanSim appears to be. I haven't played around with the software, but I would be worried if it somehow universalized (say) Fallujah as the model for all urban COIN everywhere always.
    And I'm afraid that's what you might see if you went to an all-computer simulation of COIN...depending of course on how dependent you were on the AI. If you used it like a MUD, for example, I could see the utility. The problems begin as soon as you rely on the simulation to provide the majority of the "actors" and even take on the role of factions.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  7. #27
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Steve Blair View Post
    And I'm afraid that's what you might see if you went to an all-computer simulation of COIN...depending of course on how dependent you were on the AI. If you used it like a MUD, for example, I could see the utility. The problems begin as soon as you rely on the simulation to provide the majority of the "actors" and even take on the role of factions.
    Actually, David Earnest (Old Dominion U) had a really interesting article on MMO- type multiplayer approaches to COIN simulation in the Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulations last year.

    My own classroom simulation is designed around this idea of a large number of participant interactions. It works well--especially the sense of intersecting agendas and the imperfect information flows that it generates--but it's human moderated, and pretty much takes up 90% of my week when I run it. USIP is designing software to support that type of simulation (the Open Simulation Platform), into which you would then "slot" your scenario and setting. This is all text and basic chat, though--no WoW style maps and immersive VR environment (or, for that matter, Night Elf Mohawk grenades).
    They mostly come at night. Mostly.


  8. #28
    Moderator Steve Blair's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2005
    Location
    Montana
    Posts
    3,195

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
    Actually, David Earnest (Old Dominion U) had a really interesting article on MMO- type multiplayer approaches to COIN simulation in the Journal of Defense Modeling and Simulations last year.

    My own classroom simulation is designed around this idea of a large number of participant interactions. It works well--especially the sense of intersecting agendas and the imperfect information flows that it generates--but it's human moderated, and pretty much takes up 90% of my week when I run it. USIP is designing software to support that type of simulation (the Open Simulation Platform), into which you would then "slot" your scenario and setting. This is all text and basic chat, though--no WoW style maps and immersive VR environment (or, for that matter, Night Elf Mohawk grenades).
    Our local brew is reasonably labor-intensive too, but I consider it worthwhile in that our cadets get experience with something other than automated planning processes (or simulated automated planning processes). I guess I've always viewed the computer sims as tools that can be used toward an end rather than an end in and of themselves.

    Does USIP have a downloadable version of this up yet? Last time I looked they were still testing.
    "On the plains and mountains of the American West, the United States Army had once learned everything there was to learn about hit-and-run tactics and guerrilla warfare."
    T.R. Fehrenbach This Kind of War

  9. #29
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SethB View Post
    I've used FPS' as a training aid and I think it works very well for teaching convoy operations. It does not work as well dismounted for a variety of reasons.

    But if you want to practice sectors of fire, checkpoints and radio procedures it works well at a fraction of the cost of getting everyone into a vehicle, which is what I'm told they used to do.
    About a year ago, I volunteered for a FPS simulation group. A team of volunteers with members who had combat experience took modification of "Virtual Battle Space 2" and modded it even more to try to make more parts realistic and allow for 200 people to play at once.

    It served as a great tool for practicing strategic and tactical planning, communication, and leadership. Commanders would map out a plan and routes would be drawn up. However, changes would be made, and these would have to be coordinated quickly and efficiently. I think the biggest takeaway were leadership experiences. Whether you were commanding a 90 men or 10, you could always get something out of it.

    Of course squads would practice fire sectors and moving in formation (players unfamiliar with these would learn beforehand). With the "arcade" settings exchanged for "simulation" settings, squad movement and communication became imperative to win.

    If the right FPS is used, I think that it could provide some rewarding experience.

  10. #30
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    15

    Default

    We did an exercise for our Defense Strategic Studies course we did an exercise that incorporated a lot of roleplaying. We used the event capability in Follow Me to trigger the roleplaying. Prior to the exercise we created the areas and triggers for each event. As the cadets conducted their operations events would "pop" based on a trigger, in most cases the trigger was a blue unit entering a specific area. Follow Me has the capability to show jpg, text, audio, or video events.

    For this exercise we opted for simple jpg files. Whenever the event fired a graphic would show describing the event, the cadet would decide whethere or not they needed to take action. If they did then they would move to the designated roleplay area.

    On the host machine we are able to monitor the events as they were triggered. Whenever one was triggered we would let the roleplayer know so he/she could get into character. If the cadet moved to the roleplayer area the roleplayer would do their thing.
    TJ
    War Fighting Simulation Center
    United States Military Academy
    Follow Me Wiki
    West Point NY

  11. #31
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by huskerguy7 View Post
    If the right FPS is used, I think that it could provide some rewarding experience.
    Strongly concur. The real issue is often that Soldiers loose confidence because the skills and drills used with blank ammunition out on the training area turn out to be garbage, once someone is shooting back.

    Even something as simple as the Unreal Game Engine has huge potential, even compared to something like VBS-2 and some of the ArmA-type clones.

    The only real problem I am aware of the the "PC-VC" syndrome where folks tend to be vastly more aggressive than they would be if any real sanction for "getting killed" existed. - still, that's down to the trainers.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  12. #32
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
    The only real problem I am aware of the the "PC-VC" syndrome where folks tend to be vastly more aggressive than they would be if any real sanction for "getting killed" existed. - still, that's down to the trainers.
    While with my group, we encountered this issue and it was hurting the team's performance. What did we do? We modified the respawn time from 3 seconds to 30 minutes. Next thing you know, alot of the "risky" actions begin to disappear.

    It would be really interesting to see the Unreal Game Engine used for a training program. VBS-2 is good, but it's not very "fluid". As a result, it can be buggy, difficult to use, and not look very good. With the UGE now available to anyone, it would be interesting to see how a true FPS simulation would turn out.

    Lastly, one thing that is essential for almost any simulation is that it must be human versus human. So many simulations have used a human versus AI approach. Simply, the AI isn't realistic on this level. So many simulations have invested substantial resources into their AI development which has defeated their reliability. AI may be a great partner in the future, but right now it isn't.

  13. #33
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by huskerguy7 View Post
    We modified the respawn time from 3 seconds to 30 minutes. Next thing you know, alot of the "risky" actions begin to disappear.
    For sure. Some sanction has to exist. When your dead, you're dead.
    With the UGE now available to anyone, it would be interesting to see how a true FPS simulation would turn out.
    I was amazed at what could be done using UGE. If you just look what the gamers have done with it has immense possibilities for training and is far less system specific than VBS.
    Simply, the AI isn't realistic on this level. So many simulations have invested substantial resources into their AI development which has defeated their reliability. AI may be a great partner in the future, but right now it isn't.
    Well warfare is human!!! - AI simply cannot compete with humans in a training environment. The only system I have seen that is anywhere close is the system they use in "Steel Beasts" which is amazing, and explains why it is such a good training tool, as the AI follows an orders based system.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  14. #34
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
    I was amazed at what could be done using UGE. If you just look what the gamers have done with it has immense possibilities for training and is far less system specific than VBS.
    If DoD does decide to pursue a FPS simulation software, two things need to happen.

    First off, they need to be willing to invest the money into it. In my opinion, the cost for developing a solid simulation run around $20 million USD-$25 million USD (I'm somewhat familiar with the gaming industry, so that's where I got those numbers from). Sufficient investment will allow for more development time. More development time means a better experience.

    Second, contract a gaming studio to develop it. Studios have more experience and have better scriptwriters, programmers, designers, etc. Supplementing them with a couple developers from DoD to ensure that there is a focus on realism wouldn't be a bad decision either.

    If these two steps are followed, then a true, solid FPS simulation could be developed. That's just my opinion.

  15. #35
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by huskerguy7 View Post
    First off, they need to be willing to invest the money into it. In my opinion, the cost for developing a solid simulation run around $20 million USD-$25 million USD (I'm somewhat familiar with the gaming industry, so that's where I got those numbers from). Sufficient investment will allow for more development time. More development time means a better experience.
    Based on my knowledge of the smaller games houses, those numbers would seem excessive. 90% of the functionality is there. Games like Red Orchestra and Darkest Hour are already De-facto Platoon and Battle Group simulators. OK, things like Night-Vision, and TI overlays would need to be done but that's very low cost.
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  16. #36
    Council Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Nebraska
    Posts
    137

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
    Based on my knowledge of the smaller games houses, those numbers would seem excessive. 90% of the functionality is there. Games like Red Orchestra and Darkest Hour are already De-facto Platoon and Battle Group simulators. OK, things like Night-Vision, and TI overlays would need to be done but that's very low cost.
    I might have been dreaming a little about this...let me explain.

    A popular game called "Call of Duty 4: Modern Warfare" was released by a studio called Infinity Ward. Despite being a game with an arcade feel, it still had impressive elements. These include sound, graphics, programming, scripts, and movements.

    If a studio with as much talent as IW and was told "you are suppose to make a simulation that is made for members of the military (you will be supplemented by DoD personal to ensure that a simulation is made rather than an arcade game)." These guys would then use their talent and resources to create a beautiful environment (realistic sounds, settings, etc). They also have the resources to bring in military personal to observe movement, communication, marksmanship, and the physics of shooting.

    Basically, if you bring in a "big time" studio and give them the direction, I think the benefits would be well worth it. For the first time, you would have a solid simulator.

  17. #37
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Want intuitive leaders? It would appear from this articles that a way to develop

    intuitive leaders and commanders might involve games like Call of Duty that Husker Guy mentioned. Obviously the game can't do it all but it can help accelerate decisions and actions.

    Conversely, the strategy games appear to be of little benefit in accelerating decision ability -- that doesn't mean they don't have value. Different strokes and all that...

    LINK.

  18. #38
    Council Member Ron Humphrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    1,099

    Post Been there played that

    And as stated by others, utility exists in both types and yes it would be beneficial. That question of how beneficial and to whom for what purposes will probably have a lot more to do with which you use then which one looks pertiest.

    Then again FORM over FUNCTION and all that jazz so your guesses are as good as mine as to what types becomes predominate.
    Any man can destroy that which is around him, The rare man is he who can find beauty even in the darkest hours

    Cogitationis poenam nemo patitur

  19. #39
    Council Member TAH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Kentucky
    Posts
    115

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Redleg7 View Post
    I've been a gamer for a long time starting with Avalon Hill's Panzer Blitz.

    When I ran Decisive Action exercises at CGSC the students would always complain that one aspect or another wasn't "realistic" and I would tell them "No crap Sherlock it's a freakin game". My COL showed us a slide with the following quote:

    All models are wrong; some models are useful.
    -- generally attributed to the statistician George Box

    We get pushback in regards to realism all the time. For what we are doing close enough is good enough. My question to those officers would be did you learn something useful? It's really up to the instructor to manage those expectations up front. A lot of pushback comes from "professional" modeling and sims types who have a hard time wrapping their minds around abstractions. Anyone who has played a boardgame will understand abstractions. If you look at the big sims I'd say that all of them model at the individual entity level or close to it. JWARS, WARSIM, JCATS, BBS, JANUS, etc are all entity level.
    My only iisue/concern with games/sims like DA is the abstraction of realative combat power and the % losses.

    Why not factor the % lost into a number of systems/soldiers/vehicles? Its a f'ing computer! Its good at keeping track. Then the Loggies folks could get their heads around the number of "runners" to keep in the fight and the number of ones to repair/replace.

    Agree completly with the observation its all about commander/instructor support/buy-in. Without, the game/sim will fail.

  20. #40
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Montreal
    Posts
    1,602

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rex Brynen View Post
    That's what UrbanSim appears to be. I haven't played around with the software, but I would be worried if it somehow universalized (say) Fallujah as the model for all urban COIN everywhere always.
    Update: I got to play around with UrbanSim at I/ITSEC this week, and it's actually a pretty impressive piece of software from what I could see, especially if embedded in a course properly.
    They mostly come at night. Mostly.


Similar Threads

  1. Wargaming Small Wars (merged thread)
    By Steve Blair in forum Training & Education
    Replies: 317
    Last Post: 02-21-2019, 12:14 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •